BENNY N.D v. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD

AB switch. When he came back, he was informed that one Mr.Shaji Mon P.K was electrocuted, and he succumbed to the injuries. He was suspended from service and had to remain out of service for 6 months. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated, and a charge memo was issued to the petitioner; simultaneously, prosecution under Section 304 A read with Section 34 IPC was also initiated by the police against the petitioner.

3. As per Ext.P5 judgment of Judicial Ist Class Magistrate Court -II Peermade in C.C.No.1446 of 2013, he was found not guilty of the offences punishable under Section 304A read with Section 34 IPC. But the disciplinary proceedings proceeded with and Ext.P3 enquiry report was drawn, WPC. 10899/2023 3 whereby, out of the five charges levelled against him, three were found to be proved. Therefore, he was served with a show cause notice, and he replied to it by Ext.P6. After receipt of Ext.P6, Ext.P7 final order was passed against the petitioner on 29.09.2022 imposing a punishment of barring of two increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner, thereafter, preferred Ext.P8 appeal against Ext.P7. Ext.P9 is the final order passed on 20.02.2023 in the appeal, confirming the punishment given.

4. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, wherein, it is contended that out of the five charges levelled against the petitioner under the departmental enquiry, three charges were proved on the basis of the deposition of the witnesses and show cause notice dated 03.08.2022 was issued proposing the punishment of two annual increments with cumulative effect.

5. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also considered after hearing the petitioner in person and finding that there was no ground to interfere with the punishment awarded, and the appeal was dismissed. The inquiry revealed that he neither conducted pre-work get-together nor post-work get-together as part of integrating and co-ordinating the work, which is a serious lapse on the part of the petitioner, who was supervising the work. It is also come out in enquiry that his declaration to switch on the HT line among the workers was made in the absence of the deceased lineman. The accident occurred due to the supervisory WPC. 10899/2023 4 lapse and lack of proper communication between the supervisor and the working staff. Therefore, he prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition.

6. Heard Sri.Mohammad Shiraz, counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.K.S.Anil, standing counsel for the Electricity Board.

7. Ext.P3 is the inquiry report, in which five charges were leveled against the petitioner, and only three charges were proved; they are charges Nos.2, 4, and

5. Charge No.2 is in respect of his supervisory lapse while he was in charge of the work, as he failed to coordinate pre and post-get-together to see that all the workers were free from danger before charging the HT line. Charge 4 relates to the hardship faced by the Board and the employees due to the lapse on the part of the petitioner, and charge 5 deals with a bad reputation to the Board on the lapses of the petitioner. The Main charge is charge No.1, which is not proved against him, but the charge regarding supervisory lapse is found against him. When the electrocution of the employee is not directly attributed to the lapse of the petitioner and a few lapses of supervising are proved, the punishment imposed by the authority withholding 2 annual increments with cumulative effect is not proportionate to the lapses found in the inquiry report. It is also seen that by Ext.P11, another worker who was a lineman also working with the petitioner in the said work also faced suspension and inquiry, WPC. 10899/2023 5 his punishment was reduced from 2 annual increments with cumulative effect to 1 annual increment with cumulative effect. When charge No.1 is not proved against the petitioner, but three other charges are proved which relate to the lapses on the part of the petitioner in supervising and conducting the post and pre-conferences. Definitely, it cannot be said that he is fully exonerated, though there is an acquittal from the competent criminal court. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the punishment imposed on the petitioner barring 2 annual increments with cumulative effect can be reduced to 1 annual increment with cumulative effect. Therefore, the respondents are directed to compute the benefits due to the petitioner on the basis of these findings and disburse his retirement benefits as well as pension within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. SD/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE WPC. 10899/2023 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10899/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS: Exhibit-P1 Exhibit -P2 Exhibit-P3 Exhibit-P4 Exhibit-P5 Exhibit-P6 Exhibit-P7 Exhibit-P8 Exhibit-P9 Exhibit-P10 Exhibit-P11 OF NOTE PHOTOCOPY TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF CHARGE SHEET NO.GB/DIS- ACTION/KLY/2013-14/115 DATED 27/04/2013 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPLY OF THE PETITIONER TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPORT OF ENQUIRY OF THE ENQUIRY OFFICER NO. TRUE LA&DEO/OPINION/2016 DATED 19/11/2016 OF THE LEGAL ADVISER AND DISCIPLINARY ENQUIRY OFFICER TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 20/06/2022 IN C.C. NO.1446/2013 OF JFCM-II, PEERMADE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPLY DATED 01/09/2022 OF THE PETITIONER TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO.GB1/SHAJIMON P.K./2022-23/310 DATED 29/09/2022 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL DATED 20/10/2022 OF THE PETITIONER TRUE NUMBER GB1/APPEAL/SRI.BENNY N.D/2022-23/2307 DATED 20/02/2023 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO.GB1/SHAJIMON P.K./ 2022-23/640 DATED 07/03/2023 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT True Photocopy of Order No.GB1/Appeal/Sri Binoy Mathew/2022-23/2589 dated 28/03/2023 of Dy. Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Thodupuzha. PHOTOCOPY ORDER OF